On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 01:07:47 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > I built 4.1 for rawhide. If that checks out to be OK, I can push > > an update for F23 also. > > I do not understand why a major rebase could be permitted after all the > F-23 > freezing stages? It may cause FTBFSes or even broken builds. What is then > all the release engineering good for? Why not to just run Rawhide then? > > This situation may be a FAQ, sorry I do not read every mail here. I did > not > want to be negative/discouraging, just I have seen such FTBFS > regression(s) in > Fedora in the past. > > > Jan I don't think GNU Make 4.1 would be considered a "major rebase". It's a minor point release that is either purely additive or bug fixes. The fact that we fell behind is actually pretty surprising. Also, since GNU Make 4.1 has been out for over a year, I doubt that upstream would even be supporting GNU Make 4.0 at all anymore... -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
